Skip to main content

About your Search

20121002
20121010
Search Results 0 to 19 of about 20 (some duplicates have been removed)
this number at all. leading the band is the legendary ceo of general electric, jack welch. jack, you made a lot of news today. here's the tweet you put out this morning. unbelievable jobs numbers. these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate, so change numbers. and i'm just wondering, i understand the way it works the president gets a heads up on the unemployment number 4:00 the day before and has to keep it to himself. you're saying in your tweet this morning that the news went the other way, the people working for the president somehow got the bureau of labor statistics and played with the numbers so it's down below 8 today. how does it work from your perspective? what happened here? >> all i can talk about are some of the numbers. we had 600,000 government jobs added in the last two months. we had 873,000 jobs by a household survey, which is a total estimate, from 50,000 phone calls. of those 600,000 were temporary workers. chris, these numbers are all a series of assumptions. tons of assumptions. and it just seems somewhat coincidental that the month before the election the numbe
of general electric, jack welch, who joins us right now. jack, you made a lot of news today. here is the tweet you put out this morning. unbelievable jobs numbers. these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate so change numbers. and i'm just wondering, i understand the way it works is the president gets a heads-up on the unemployment number 4:00 the day before and has to keep it to himself. you're saying in your tweet this morning that the news went the other way, that the people working for the president somehow got the bls, the bureau of labor statistics, and played with the numbers so it would come down below 8% today. how does it work from your perspective? what happened here? >> well, chris, all i can talk about are some of the numbers. we had 600,000 government jobs added in the last two months. we had 873,000 jobs by a household survey, which is a total estimate from 50,000 phone calls. of those 600,000 were temporary workers. chris, these numbers are all a series of assumptions, tons of assumptions, and it just seems somewhat coincidental that the month before the elec
to have. tweeting doesn't seem like something i'd hear from jack welch. unbelievable job numbers, fair enough. these chicago guys will do anything to change the numbers. what evidence do you have to the chicago guys got to the bureau of labor statistics and jimmied these numbers by 0.3%. >> i have no evidence. i just raised the question. >> you didn't raise the question. you are asserting in your tweet that you put out at 8:35 this morning, five minutes after the report came out that did you talk to the economists or anyone who understand how the numbers were put together before you accused the chicago guys of changing the numbers? >> chris, i know these numbers are gathered by a series of wild assumptions, maybe they weren't right at 8.5. maybe they weren't right at 8.4. but it seems coincidental that one month before the election, they would end up at 7.8. the president today is on the stump. the president, all he's talked about is 7.8. he didn't mention 600,000 jobs added in the government sector. >> see -- it's not your attitude about obama people care about, it's your analysis. yo
, i think they'll be l. >> hey, larry, huge interview tonight. you have jack welch, what else is cooking? >> 7.8% unemployment. is this magic number of president obama for real or was it cooked? good evening, i'm larry kudlow. this is "the kudlow report." team obama doing a victory lap, rejoicing over the 7.8% victory lap. my guest, jack welch, is questioning whether the numbers were cooked to help president obama. mr. welch will respond live and talk to me in a moment. this whole thing comes as the romney roll continues. scott rasmussen has three polls showing a dead heat in battle ground states, hai, virginia, florida. even the liberal magazine "the new yorker" sees it on their front cover, mitt romney pulling a clint eastwood, debating an empty chair. first up, it was the tweet that was heard around the world. my good friend jack welch set off a social media firestorm. take a look at his tweet. "unbelievable jobs numbers. these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate so change numbers, end quote. he's chase by accusing the white house of skewing the data to help preside
theorists who openly suggested the white house manipulated the numbers. forward ceo jack welch led the crowd with this tweet "unbelievable jobs numbers. these chicago guys will do anything can't debate so change numbers". he refused to back down on last night's msnbc. >> i have no evidence to prove that. i just raised the question. >> you didn't raise the question. you said these chicago guys will do anything so they change the numbers. you want to take that back? >> this is an assertion. >> jimmying with these numbers. corruption here. infiltration or getting to -- it's not funnies jack. you're talking about the president of the united states playing with the bureau of labor statistics numbers. this is mixing stuff. do you want to take back the charge here? >> i don't want to take back one word in that tweet. >> oh, this is good. what's the word from the white house folks today on these jobs numbers? are they being cautious about them at all? >> you heard the president be cautious. the president and his advisers and everybody on down the line is going to be very quick to add that there are
two years in several decades during this recovery. >> you know, jack welch, the former ceo of ge, he tweeted this because he didn't believe these numbers. he tweeted "unbelievable jobs numbers. these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate so change numbers." now, there are others who are suggesting there was political influence over the bureau of labor statistics that are driving these numbers, trying to make the president look good only a few weeks before the election. you're familiar with the economists, the statisticians who work there. what do you say to these folks who see some conspirator yal involvement out there. >> that's totally, totally insane. i'm friend with jack welch and i tweeted him back. i said, jack, i love you, but on this one you've just flat out lost your mind. there's an ironclad firewall with criminal penalties for anybody at the bls to have any kind of political interference or to release any of the numbers early. it's totally impossible to do that. you've seen all the reputable republicans that have worked with the bureau of labor statistics in the past
this week, but we did get numbers mixed and consumer confidence is good and unemployment and yet, jack welch, the former ceo of general electric as you just mentioned on squawk out on twitter today. he's been obviously critical of the white house for years now, but he says unbelievable jobs numbers. these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate so change numbers. that's the former head of a very large company. >> i'm on tv, and i remember jack sent me a fax when i was first on with mark haynes. i like you. i love jack. i'm trying to reconcile jack with the numbers because i trust jack and think he's terrific. i come back and say listen, they've been wrong -- he's jack. i don't think that they're phony. it doesn't make me feel that jack is off the reservation so much that i think that this particular issue -- i disagree with him. i read the tweet and i was, darn, jack, come on, man. >> let's say good is good. >> does this mark the turning point and we had david come out this morning where he was establishing 1575 and that's quite an upside for 2013 particularly if he's standing by a year-
is getting better. think of it. you know who says it's not getting better? jack welch. he'll tell me why in a moment. despite the rally since 2009, investors have yanked hundreds of billions of dollars out of the market. is there a lost generation of investors? can they come back in.
months now. the economic situation is getting better. >> i think it's the opposite of what jack welch was saying. we talk about jack welch and what he said and the conspiracy theory, but the thing is, he said given the economy -- >> that's not even what i'm getting at. >> people feel fundamentally better about the state of the economy. >> did i say i love jack welch? >> forget what jack welch said. i'm talking about people who are trying to say that perhaps people have given up. and if you look into the numbers of the bureau of labor and statistics put out, the number of people who are discouraged and have given up has gone down in the past year by 235,000. and in the past four years, by over 400,000. that number is being skewed out there by those who want to say that the job numbers aren't what they appear to be. long-term unemployment is still very, very high, but those people are still looking. >> the u-6 number for those cognizant. >> coming up -- >> you're right. republicans are in the dumps. you're right. >> no, they're trying to pretend the numbers that they depend on when they
are historically low. there is an uptick of 0.1%. these numbers don't add up. you said jack welch who has been called by many the ceo of the past quarter century, a guy we know very well. jack welch has an opinion on this. >> he has a tweet being widely retweeted. i read from jack's certified twitter account. unbelievable job numbers. these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate so change numbers. >> okay. >> that's quite a charge. >> by jack and mark barnicle, we know jack. he's nonpartisan. >> not going there. he said that with a wink, right? >> i don't know. >> jack? >> let me tell you something seriously. these numbers don't add up. they just don't. again, i've got no dog in the fight here as far as the numbers go. >> you want them to be good. >> we all want them to be good. my dad was unemployed. i always, you know, conservatives always get angry at me when i cheer good economic news. but mike these numbers don't add up. it doesn't make sense it would drop to 7.8% with a weak participation rate and anemic number of jobs added. >> look, i am totally unqualified to weave my way through
the jobs number doesn't matter. is that in part this whole jack welch thing over the weekend around whether the numbers are real, does that matter in all of this? >> i think the jack welch stuff was crazy talk. and earlier in the year when you guys were down in washington on this, joe and i talked about it, there were between points that i would make. one, nobody messes or manipulates these numbers. but, took i think we exaggerate the importance of the numbers for this reason. the people who will vote on november the 6th know what they feel about the economy already. they're living it every day. so because there's a headline that says 7.8, it's a talking point, but they already know what their friends and neighbors are doing. >> when do we find out how romney is fun raising compared to that 180 million or whatever? >> i think if it was so par with obama's, we would have heard already. i think it's probably behind. >> you don't hear that that's unbecoming to have so much money to spend. just don't hear -- it's alway s the republicans. >> it's not decided by money. nice to have, but there is
Search Results 0 to 19 of about 20 (some duplicates have been removed)